October 15th, 2010
While the voters skittishly wait in their starting gates for the upcoming Derby to liberate a considerable number of Democrats from their seats, the usual suspects in Washington have been acting up in all sorts of odd ways. The President, for example, bizarrely compared the "freeing of the slaves" to his morose economy, there are hypocritical Media attacks on Meg Whitman in California for (OMG!) employing an undiscovered illegal. Barney Frank, for the first time in his Congressional career, finds himself in the rare position of "being in a tight one" in Massachusetts and regretting it--while also presenting the ostensibly rare situation of his actually not enjoying the possibility of going down. We even have reports of hyper-space illegal aliens tampering with nukes which caused the United Nations to designate an official for the global purpose of greeting space aliens, a galactic Wal-mart Greeter on steroids...sort of.
Rahm Emanuel's departure --from POTUS Chief of Staff to Chicago Mayor--being hailed as a "wow" event --which seems more to us like going from french truffles to canned sardines--even while the remaining members of Obama's staff depart as a result of their finally running out of bad ideas. You do get the picture, most likely, however, if it is indeed true that professional Politicians develop a sort of extra-sensory perception when it comes to divining a particular political situation, we can then begin to understand all of these parapolitical activities that seem to be going bump in the night all around the Nation.
In fact, we have all heard of the extra-sensory perception that most animals exhibit when a tsunami, earthquake or other such disaster is bearing down on their particular locale, even while most humans remain blissfully oblivious. However, in this case, the Washington Democrats can just seem to now feel the tsunami of outraged votes which will sweep many out of office despite conflicting reports by some in the Mainstream Media.
Democrats Finally Seeking Higher Ground... But It's Not What You Think
Just as "We the People" could only stand by and watch numbly during Congress' legislative devastation of our economy over the past 21 months, fittingly, there is nothing that they, the Democrats, can now do about the power of the People's greatest equalizer, that being a vote. But just as with creatures fleeing from a tsunami, the Democrats can be seen fleeing the low-lying swampland of Washington, no doubt, seeking higher ground in a vain effort to avoid the wave that's building in the troubled Sea of People that make up America.
As a result, the Democratic Leadership of Pelosi, Reid and Obama appear to be beside themselves, as Ma and Pa Voter are en route and only a few miles from the House, the effects of a two year long, drunken binge of wild Polititeen partying even now raging--the devastation of the "social" Party's effects impossible to hide. There is simply no way they can clean up the mess and camouflage the damage--or in essence try to eliminate the evidence of their plunder before the "true enforcers" arrive, and the punishment promises to be severe. Ma and Pa Voter know exactly how to tidy up this particular mess, even while the culpables in charge continue to blame it on the wallflowers at the party, which simply will not work.
Obama, after passing a ludicrous $ 30 Billion dollar pin-prick of a "make-up" bill in a $14 Trillion dollar economy, even seeks to now belatedly "aid Small Business" after ignoring it for 19 months, even as rumors emerge of a possible Chinese purchase of GM after the election. Predictably, Obama now argues for another stimulus to give to his highwaymen cronies in the form of "infrastructure refurbishment," which could only worsen the budget damage, even while blaming his opposition for the budget problems.
But, after the peals of enraged laughter from America itself at the President's disingenuous budgetary lunacy, Obama has now embarked on a campaign to damage, yet again, the one major member of the televised media that does not dance to the President's desired tune. Obama, already nursing a reputation as being extraordinarily thin-skinned for a sitting President, has gone on the attack against Fox News yet again for reporting the news without fluffing it up properly, apparently.
Um...I Need New Windshield Wipers
Regarding the President's ongoing and repeated assaults against the "True" Fourth Estate, it has been our observation that in Obama's me first way of narcissistic thinking, the problem that the American People have with Obama and his flawed ideological goals was certainly not his:
- Campaign to damage the private sector in a landslide of myriad ways covered extensively by this website over the past 13 months
- Destroy our medical system while curtailing Employer Group Health Programs, with employers fidgeting and some insurers already dropping out
- Taking over and then bankrupting two major car manufacturers and then giving the bulk of the proceeds to his Union supporters
- Takeover of the banks and enforcing pay limitations while the Federal Government's average pay has risen to double that of comparable private industry
- Issuing orders to severely curtail America's fuel energy resources in the Gulf and elsewhere, leaving thousands jobless
- Consistently bypassing Congress on high profile appointment positions, while appointing severe ideologues to such positions
- Appointing a Justice Department Chief that practices reverse racism policies against the bulk of the Nation's population and coddles terrorists
- Insulting the entire Supreme Court during a State of the Union Address while Congress applauded due to a Freedom of Speech decision
- Supporting and then running over the very ACORN organization that got him elected and then denying that he was intimately familiar with it
Nor was it the President's fault that he either authorized or ordered the actions of:
- Vilifying and denigrating the concerned members of citizens, such as The Tea Party, despite the fact that most Americans identify expressly with the movement
- Singling out and attacking opposing dissidents in the traditional and new media, even going so far as appointing a Czar to regulate free speech on the air
- Constructing efforts at taking over and possibly even controlling the internet, a page taken from the Chinese Communists and Dictator Chavez, among many others against Liberty
- Presiding over a Government takeover of school loan programs which left many private industry banks in a lurch
- Failing to pass an even now hidden budget due to its horribly damaging political implications, while continually allowing Government programs such as flood insurance to be interrupted
- Purposefully losing the war effort in Afghanistan while refusing the advise of his Generals and then blaming them for not meeting his conflicting goals
We can, quite honestly, go on and on ad nauseum. In fact, the list above was, somewhat surprisingly, written fairly quickly without consulting any outside material whatsoever. Was this because the writer has a photographic memory? Heavens no! This particular phenomenon can easily be likened to driving a vehicle through a storm of insects for miles on end and then being utterly amazed at the prodigious number that have splatted onto your windshield.
Behold: The Messiah Can Do No Wrong
Regardless, these actions by both the President and the Democrats which have enraged the public had nothing to do with the President's still declining popularity. Not at all; in fact, much like a bratty, spoiled child, the President actually thinks and has stated that the venom of criticism that has poured his way from his policies was all the Fox News Network's fault for reporting it without spinning it like the other news organizations!
The President, when he made this jaw-dropping accusation, actually used a type of wording that could not fail to perk up anyone's ear in alarm who was listening carefully. Obama, who never met an executive order he would hesitate to decree, actually stated the following:
"Foxes point of view, I think, is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a Country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world."
Now, laying the alarm aside for a moment, as with all Obamaisms that we have thoughtfully recounted for the past 19 months of his Presidency, and even a year on the campaign trail, the President, here, may be employing one of his Saul Alinsky type techniques. Why, you might ask? Check this mirror image out with the first word traded:
"Obama's point of view, I think, is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a Country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world."
Now, if we look at the meaning of these two statements, which one do you think fits "the most precisely" into the world that we Americans now find ourselves mired within? Obama has taken what he and the Democrats have repeatedly done to this Nation over the past nearly two years and then disingenuously pointed the blame, rather hilariously, at Fox News, for Heaven's sake.
So, our question as logical Americans to the President would simply be this: Which bill that was passed in the last two years or more did Fox News originate, vote on and then pass into law?
"This Ship Is Unsinkable" = "We Are Turning a Corner"
The answer here, being beyond obvious, points to a streak of obvious paranoid delusion within the President, which should prove somewhat alarming to any who pay attention. But the other questions which bobble to the surface take on an even deeper and more alarming meaning. We have all seen what has happened to our middle class and long-term growth prospects with massive deficits stretching off into the hinterland, a rapid decline in our ability to compete as Obama's many and varied industry blocking and entangling exercises have ham-strung virtually every endeavor that American Business undertakes.
But the next few points are layered in a different danger it would seem. One has to begin to wonder if the President does not now know and understand that his policies are wrecking America? Virtually every economic indicator has been down even while we have learned that the Fed may be, apparently, buying equities in the Stock Market in order to temporarily prop the market up prior to the election, while dangerously creating another artificial bubble that cannot endure for long. We all remember the Housing market bubble and what ensued from that man-made disaster and even who artfully created it and then blamed its effects upon the hapless Republicans.
As we have repeatedly warned for the past 12 months, we can also see a rapid corrosion of both our Medical system and it's primary method of private funding, our Health Insurance industry. As recently as this past week, corporate food monster McDonald's was reported in the Wall Street Journal as being unable to comply with the Federal mandates enumerated by Obamacare. McDonald's had apparently indicated to the Officials now in charge of America's formerly private healthcare programs, that the plan was unaffordable as instituted, and they would therefore be cutting insurance for at least 30,000 employees unless something could be done. The response from a now self-traumatized Administration was seemingly hasty indeed.
"At the Secretary's Discretion" is Unlawful And Unconstitutional
Within our "new" Healthcare system's componentry, lies a written ability to waive various restrictions and adherents at the deeming of the Secretary in charge, and apparently this waiver was granted by the Secretary despite her assurances that it was up to the States--even after the States were overridden in the decision of the Federal Government to mandate the coverage in the first place (remember the 22 States currently suing the Fed for the unconstitutionality of the new healthcare law?). Denials of this Obamacare problem rapidly ensued from all parties involved--in essence concluding that the reports were untrue--even while going into details about how the Government was handling the "non-existent" untrue problem. You just can't make this stuff up.
So what exactly determines a Company's ability to have damaging restrictions waived, that other Companies who may not wield the same influence, must follow? Is it perhaps the promise of future Campaign contributions for particular favors from on high or simple adherence to the faith of those in power? John Hood, of the Conservative John Locke Foundation, also suffers similar problems with Obamacare, as the Health Insurer for his two dozen employees has decided to pull out of the Group Insurance Industry resulting from Obamacare. Even better is the fact that both Hood and his employees had found a combination of plans which were affordable and even liked.
Will the Administration intervene here as well, waving their wand of favoritism so that Hood's Conservative Foundation can bypass the paperwork blizzard and expense of changing insurance plans? Doubtful, you see favoritism only extends to those who either wield great power or great influence on behalf and in favor of Government. The ideological opposition need not apply.
And so it is with a Government that seeks enhanced influence and authority by eschewing the very Rule of Law that placed it within power. One of Socialism's favorite pets is favoritism and the fear of it being withheld is the incremental vehicle by which the Authoritarians ascend their power.
"The people never give up their liberty but under some delusion."
October 15th, 2010
October 15th, 2010
See which House, Senate and governors' races are considered closest.
Wall Street Journal
By BRODY MULLINS and DANNY YADRON
WASHINGTON—A late effort by Democrats to match record fund raising by conservative organizations has come up short, leaving the party more reliant than usual on the campaign efforts of labor unions.
A key pro-Democratic group, recently created by top party insiders to build a "firewall" around the Democrats' majority in the House, said Thursday it hoped to raise $10 million. That's a fraction of the $50 million that an alliance of GOP groups said Tuesday they would spend to help Republicans in dozens of House races.
"We are David vs. Goliath," said Ramona Oliver, a spokeswoman for the new Democratic group, called America's Families First Action Fund. Founded this summer, it began raising money after Labor Day to help counter Republican fundraising efforts. It once hoped to help protect up to 30 Democratic House seats, but is now focusing on just 18 campaigns, Ms. Oliver said.
In total, outside conservative groups—such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Action Network and American Crossroads—could spend more than $300 million on TV advertisements, campaign mailings and other efforts to elect Republicans to Congress this year. Outside Democratic groups, by contrast, plan to spend about $100 million on those activities. The largest labor unions say they will spend $200 million combined, but most of their focus will be on rallying union voters.
The spending by outside GOP groups is key because in the last three election cycles Democratic outside groups have substantially outspent their GOP rivals.
Overall, the Democratic party and its candidates still have more money at their disposal than their GOP rivals. In the closest 40 House and 12 Senate races, the Democratic candidate, on average, has twice as much money in the bank as the GOP opponent, according to the most recent fund-raising data. That's in part because many are incumbents who can more easily raise big money in advance of the election.
But among outside campaign organizations, Democrats are being outgunned, helping erase the Democrats' overall financial advantage. This lets Republicans inject money into races where Democrats had a big cash advantage, leaving Democratic candidates more reliant on the get-out-the-vote activities of the largest labor unions.
Evan Tracey, who runs a group that tracks political ad spending, said outside Republican groups were running ads in 70 House races while Democratic groups are running ads in nine House campaigns.
"Fewer targets, less money," said Craig Varoga, who runs a pro-Democratic campaign group called Patriot Majority. Mr. Varoga said his group would spend between $7 million and $8 million to help Democrats in a "half-dozen or so" congressional races. In the 2008 election, the group spent $14 million in 22 campaigns, Mr. Varoga said.
People who run outside Democratic groups said they were raising less money than in prior elections because donors were upset Democrats didn't accomplish more with President Barack Obama in the White House and strong Congressional majorities.
Some of the Democrats' biggest donors are sitting on the sidelines, including George Soros, the billionaire investor, who has donated millions of dollars to campaigns in the past decade.
Jim Jordan, a Democratic political consultant, plans to spend "several million dollars" on advertisements to help Democratic candidates through a group called Commonsense Ten. He said some donors were increasingly alert to the funding disparity. "There are signs of a thaw, but it's late," Mr. Jordan said.
Spending by the largest labor unions on the 2010 elections is expected to amount to about 10% of the total spent to elect Democrats by political parties, outside political entities and the candidates themselves. A precise number is hard to calculate because not all spending is made public. There is also a time lag in the spending disclosures.
In interviews, major unions said they planned on spending as much as or more than they did on the midterm congressional races in 2006. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said they hoped to create a "firewall" in some of the closest House races to protect the Democrats' majority.
In a meeting with reporters this week, Mr. Trumka said 37 of the 75 House seats in play were what he called "high union density" districts, from the suburbs of Chicago to the working-class regions of Pennsylvania.
"We feel an incredible responsibility," said Karen White, political director for the National Education Association, a teachers' union. She said her union planned to spend $40 million on the 2010 elections, an increase from 2006, and last week it announced a $15 million ad campaign in close House races.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees will send resources even to help elect Democratic candidates who haven't always backed its causes. "There are some candidates who are going to get some resources from us who in a normal year would not," said Larry Scanlon, the union's political director.
Under current likely election scenarios, GOP candidates would need to win 59% of those Democratic seats up for grabs to gain control of the House.
The Service Employees International Union said it would spend $44 million on the 2010 elections, up from $35 million in the 2006 midterm elections. In Virginia, the SEIU launched an ad this week attacking the Republican trying to unseat freshman Democratic Rep. Tom Perriello. In California, the SEIU is spending $5 million this fall to help elect Jerry Brown as governor.
The AFL-CIO said it was on pace to deploy 200,000 volunteers to campaign on behalf of candidates this election, its most ever in a midterm election. The union said it has distributed 17.5 million flyers on visits to worksites advocating the election of mostly Democratic candidates.
The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics said the Democratic Party and candidates had raised a total of $1.25 billion so far for the election. The comparable GOP figure is $1.1 billion.